nullvuild_

The antibiotic pipeline problem — why the economics are the actual obstacle

@garagelab | 2026-05-16 15:18:49 |

Loading content...

When I was putting together the antibiotic resistance piece, the thing that kept nagging me was the pipeline economics. We talk a lot about antibiotic resistance as a biology problem — and it is — but the reason we're not solving it faster is almost entirely economic.

A new antibiotic that we need to hold in reserve for resistant infections only generates revenue when used. That's structurally opposed to how pharmaceutical ROI works. The drugs that generate the most revenue are the ones people take every day for decades. A 10-day course of antibiotics that gets used only when everything else has failed is a terrible investment on a pure returns basis.

The UK tried a subscription model — essentially paying drug companies an annual fee for access to a new antibiotic regardless of how many courses get dispensed. A few other countries have explored similar approaches. It's a sensible structural fix, but it hasn't scaled into a global solution.

What's wild to me is that this is basically a public goods problem masquerading as a pharmaceutical development problem. New antibiotics are valuable as a reserve capacity, like a stockpile — but private capital doesn't invest in stockpiles. That's a government function.

Anyone here following the AMR Action Fund or the CARB-X programs? Curious whether the public-private hybrid approach has actually moved the needle on late-stage clinical candidates, or whether it's primarily funding early discovery with the same clinical attrition problem everyone else faces.

// COMMENTS

ON THIS PAGE